ReviewClinical and translational science2024
Crushing tablets or sprinkling capsules: Implications for clinical strategy and study performance based on BE studies of rivaroxaban and deferasirox.
Review in Clinical and translational science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Companion Diagnostics in Clinical Therapy: Current Applications and Future Directions.MedComm · 2026Review
- Recovery and Stability of Omadacycline 150-mg Crushed Tablets Dispersed in Food or Water and Administered via Nasogastric Tube.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Alternative Administration of Antiretroviral Therapy in People with HIV Unable to Swallow: A Scoping Review.HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Beyond Dysphagia in Parkinson's Disease: 3D Printing of Orally Disintegrating Tablets (ODTs) for Optimized Treatment.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Crushing tablets or sprinkling capsules: Implications for clinical strategy and study performance based on BE studies of rivaroxaban and deferasirox.Clinical and translational science · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Administration of oral medicinal products as crushed tablets or open capsules is an important delivery option for patients suffering from dysphagia. To obtain full interchangeability of generics with the original products, demonstration of bioequivalence (BE) between both products administered as crushed tablets/open capsules was required for poorly soluble product by European Medicines Agency (EMA) at the time of development of our rivaroxaban and deferasirox generic products. We present the results of two BE studies with modified administration of these products, which compared relative bioavailability between generic and reference products. In the rivaroxaban study, the test product was administered as a capsule sprinkled on and mixed with applesauce, whereas the reference tablet was crushed and administered with applesauce under fed conditions. In the deferasirox study, both treatments were administered as crushed tablets under fasting conditions. Both studies applied a two-way crossover design and were conducted after a single-dose in healthy volunteers. The 90% confidence interval of the geometric mean ratio area under the analyte concentration versus time curve, from time zero to the time of the last measurable analyte concentration and maximum measured analyte concentration over the sampling period of the test to reference ratio were 103.36-110.37% and 97.98-108.45% for rivaroxaban, respectively, and 96.69-107.29% and 94.19-109.45% for deferasirox, respectively. Thus, the BE criteria (80.00-125.00%) were met in both studies which demonstrated that bioavailability was not affected when the test and reference products were administered in the form of crushed tablet/open capsule. These results support the argument of redundancy of crushed product studies for poorly soluble drugs, which is in line with the currently revised position of the EMA on this topic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.